girlmeetsworldfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Girl Meets Belief/@comment-24055022-20151115031738/@comment-26999065-20151117074632
Venial sins vs Mortal sins - yes, I've heard, though who gets to decide which is which is debatable. Interpretations vary. Some say any sex (of any kind) other than "marital relations while trying to make a baby" are mortal sins. Certainly unnatural sex (like oral sex, etc.) is as bad as homosexuality, but it doesn't carry the same weight according to some, but does according to others. So you see the problem. Yes, I've read the Bible and those passages, but I appreciate when they speak of homosexuality, they didn't mean what you and I mean today. Knowledge marches forward - things change - language changes - translations are often spotty. But since they didn't understand sexual attraction to the same gender was something that naturally happens in a small percentage of humans all the time and regularly, and isn't really a choice, they never really addressed that or could possibly know that is what was natural for a small percentage of humans - and so called them unnatural. Paul did address what he saw, and he was shocked and appalled at the homosexual rape of male slaves and young boys, which he naturally assumed was being committed by heterosexual men (because there was no other known kind of man than "normal") but who occasionally did those awful things. Regardless of your belief or your interpretation, however, my point was there is more than one way to interpret such passages, so claiming to have the one and only true interpretation is pretty arrogant and pretty insulting to anyone and everyone who interprets those passages differently. Of course one is free (theoretically, in this country) to cling to whichever interpretations bring them comfort. For some, that's just an interpretation that condemns all homosexuals to Hell everlasting. I don't know why that would bring anyone comfort, but it seems to for some. If that's you, that's your choice. If that's not you, that's your choice. But I fail to see the wisdom in bringing it up in this forum in an unsolicited manner, particularly since the topic was never addressed in the episode. I do, however, see a reason to respond to it when somebody else brings it up, even if it's not directed at oneself, for an injustice to your neighbor is as an injustice to yourself, and it should not stand unchallenged. But that's more philosophy for you than religion. Sure, some believe you can be forgiven anything. Kill a guy but ask for forgiveness 1 second before you die and you can go to heaven. Get blindsided and die one second before you can ask for forgiveness and you go to hell. Seems silly to me, but I don't make the rules, nor particularly believe in them, but I'll defend the right of others to believe in them, if they want. I'm not as keen, however, in remaining silent when they insist on bringing them up in a public forum - especially when they couch them in terms of facts rather than terms of belief. Saying "God exist" is annoying. Saying "I believe in God" is not. Saying "God doesn't exist" is annoying. Saying "I don't believe God exist" is not. You make clear you are talking about your personal beliefs, and who can argue with that? If you instead claim they are facts, or speak of them as if they are facts in a public forum where like-minded people have not congregated for that specific purpose, and then anybody and everybody who knows just as certainly as you, but differently, can of course argue with that. And the thing about religious arguments - people are, sadly, quite willing to kill, even in the name of an all loving God - especially if intolerance is allowed to go unchallenged and taught to be an acceptable form of behavior. But if not allowed to go unchallenged, hopefully things won't get that bad. For what it's worth.